It is best to choose a real, medium complexity process. At Flokzu we offer a free 14-day trial of our Premium service. For more information visit: https://www.flokzu.com/blog/en/bpm/cloud-bpm-tools-comparison-for-managers/

1. Cloud BPM Tools Comparison for
Managers
Choosing a Business Process Management Suite (BPM & Workflow) is not a simple
task at all. A first decision to make is between on-premise vs cloud-based tools. On-
premise means installing on your own servers. On the other hand, the cloud means
using the software as a service over the Internet. In this post, we will focus on the
latter. We will offer useful criteria for Managers and C-Levels, to make an adequate
cloud BPM tools comparison. We will leave aside the endless comparisons of
features and functionalities (like this example), which bring little to the decision
maker.
For an adequate cloud BPM tools comparison, we will focus on four fundamental
dimensions for the manager:
1. Ease of adoption of the tool in the organization
2. Convenience, from the economic point of view and its cost/benefit ratio
3. Agility, to respond to changes, show results and accompany business needs
4. Coverage, to have the peace of mind that the needs that arise tomorrow will
be considered
We will pass each of these criteria through the four market-leading BPM tools in the
cloud. All of them are of excellent quality but have very different characteristics:
Kissflow, Process Maker, Nintex, and Flokzu.

2. Ease of adoption
First of all, the ease of adoption of the BPM solution should be the most important
criterion for the cloud BPM tools comparison. BPM initiatives, like almost all
enterprise-class initiatives, have high rates of resistance among users. This happens
because they transform the way people work. And that resistance leads to high
levels of failure. According to this Forbes study, the same is true for most Digital
Transformation initiatives, when they are not seen as a gradual change but as an
end in themselves. Ignoring this fact of reality is a dangerous mistake. The worst
consequence is that users cannot “get on the wave” of process management.
To ensure rapid and consistent adoption, the most important aspects are a very
user-friendly interface, excellent support, and the ability to quickly make
improvements and changes to processes.
Kissflow: polished user interface, friendly and with modern components. Technical
support works, but it was not as fast and effective as expected. Improvements and
changes are made very quickly. The product, a non-code BPM, allows you to
configure and modify processes very quickly. The weakest point is its limited
functionality for configuring processes. This prevents some of the typical needs of
workflow users from being met and can lead to rejection.
ProcessMaker: very broad functional set that allows us to meet different user needs.
The user interface is old, based on the tabular paradigm with rows for each element.
Technical support is not included in the open source version but is available for paid
plans (more than USD 500 per month). Changes and improvements cannot be
introduced very quickly, because the product is developer-oriented (unlike non-code
BPM or low-code BPM).
Nintex: highly integrated product with SharePoint, users who already use this
platform will be comfortable. The functional set is broad and allows to meet most of
the needs. The user interface is correct, without standing out. Technical support is
only available on paid plans (starting at USD 625). The product has its roots in the
on-premise model, inheriting several features, including that it is more developer-
oriented than business user-oriented, so changes involve technical expertise and
take time, reducing the ability to meet user needs quickly.
Flokzu: an extremely user-friendly interface, with a powerful full-text search engine,
alerts, and reports that provide the user with a comfortable and productive
environment. Technical support works across all plans provided by process analysts
who are able to make suggestions because they understand business needs. The
product provides a Software as a Service (SaaS), pure non-Code BPM when it
comes to deploying simple processes very quickly (i.e. process deployed in 6
minutes). However, it also offers the possibility of extending its operation with scripts

3. and Web Services (low-code BPM) in order to meet advanced requirements and
specific needs of users.
Economic Convenience
Convenience, determined by its cost/benefit ratio, is a very relevant criterion in the
cloud BPM tools comparison.
Kissflow: provides a very competitive price, starting at USD 9 per user per month.
There is a 10 users minimum, so in fact the price starts at USD 90 per month. This
price includes the platform as a service as well as support services. Adding this to
the fact that it takes only a few hours to set up a process makes the equation very
attractive. The main problem is that the limited functionality can avoid meeting the
needs of the business, reducing the benefit obtained. The non-use of
the BPMN standard implies higher costs for disseminating and sharing process
models.
ProcessMaker: provides a free, open-source option that must be installed on-
premise so it’s outside this cloud BPM tools comparison. Cloud plans start at USD
1000 and require technical staff with programming skills. In addition to the cost, this
is time-consuming and the processes will take longer to deploy.
Nintex: does not provide a free trial option. The Standard Starter Package, which
costs USD 625, includes only five workflows and twenty-five forms. The next
package called Enterprise also has the limitation of five workflows and twenty-five
forms. For an organization looking to automate all its processes, a customized quote
will be necessary and probably more expensive. The deployment time is not fast plus
it’s oriented to technical staff. However, its wide range of functions allows it to meet
most needs.
Flokzu: provides a 14-day Free Trial and offers two types of service plans. The first
one, based on the number of nominated users, has a starting price of USD 15 per
user per month. The other, based on the number of new process instances, has an
initial price of USD 50 and unlimited users. The customer can change plans at any
time, which gives flexibility. The ability to deploy processes quickly allows you to test
the product immediately. This makes it easier to check if it fits your needs, at a
reasonable cost.
Agility to respond to changes
Agility is a fundamental criterion in a cloud BPM tools comparison since it measures
the capacity to react in time to changes in the market, regulatory or internal.
Kissflow: being a non-code tool, it is very agile when it comes to modifying a
process and deploying it again. On the other hand, its incompatibility with
the BPMN modeling standard may delay the understanding of the new processes.

4. The dimensioned set of functionalities may require external (and time-consuming)
developments to meet specific needs.
ProcessMaker: its orientation to technical personnel with programming skills to
modify processes makes it less agile since processes must go through a Software
Engineering cycle (design, development, testing, corrections, production) that it’s
time-consuming, even if short. Its wide range of functions makes it possible to
mitigate this problem. Probably all the needs can be met with the tool, without
external developments.
Nintex: same as ProcessMaker, takes time but you can probably resolve any
changes with the tool itself. If the organization also uses SharePoint, changes are
likely to be more agile with Nintex. On the other hand, if the organization decides to
depart from SharePoint, it will face associated complications.
Flokzu: its no-code / low-code model allows you to change processes quickly and
deploy them, without requiring programming (no-code), or with very little (low-code).
Add this to a process versioning mechanism and automatic migration to the latest
version. This way, you can test and deploy changes very quickly. It provides a library
of ready-to-use, ready-to-use processes that accelerate time-to-market. Public
forms allow you to display a form on a website to initiate processes, without
programming anything. Custom reports allow the user to configure them, reducing
the number of IT requests for development.
Coverage of future needs
By Coverage, we mean the ability of the product to cover all unforeseen and
additional situations to the initial plan that may occur in the future. Process
management is not an end in itself, but a path to follow. Therefore, this is a long-term
criterion, significant to the cloud BPM tools comparison.

5. Kissflow: being a cloud-based, enterprise-class tool, it’s safe to assume that it
meets all the requirements of scalability, fault tolerance and security (checking them
is beyond the scope of this comparison). When it comes to its integration capabilities
with other legacy systems, it supports some integration through REST Web
Services. It also includes a Zapier connector to integrate with other web apps. As a
weak point, we can identify their limited process management functionality, which
may prevent them from meeting future needs.
Process Maker: being a cloud-based, enterprise-class tool, it’s safe to assume that
it meets all the requirements of scalability, fault tolerance and security (verifying
them is beyond the scope of this comparison). Regarding its integration capabilities
with other legacy systems, it supports integration through REST Web Services. Its
wide range of functions and its BPMN support will allow us to take into account a
large part of the future needs of the business. Furthermore, we can identify their
limited process management functionality, which may prevent them from meeting
future needs. In contrast, it does not provide a Zapier or other IFTTT connector. As a
result, you will find limitations to connect your process with other web apps.
Nintex: being a corporate tool, it is to be assumed that it meets all the requirements
of scalability, fault tolerance and security (to verify them is beyond the scope of this
comparison). When it comes to its integration capabilities with legacy systems, it
supports integration via REST Web Services, but this requires intensive
programming. It also connects with Zapier. Not supporting the BPMN standard limits,
your ability to share diagrams. Its strong integration with SharePoint is an advantage
if the organization continues to use this platform, and a strong constraint if it decides
to change it.
Flokzu: runs on Amazon Web Services, the global leader in cloud platforms,
meeting the highest standards of scalability, fault tolerance and security. Flokzu
supports Web Services SOAP and REST, both at the form and process level. This
allows for the integration of legacy systems into processes or the extension of
functionalities through specialized services. It also provides a Zapier connector to
integrate with thousands of other Web applications. At the form level, it provides
a Script Engine that allows you to include complex logic and thus meet needs that
may arise in the future.
Cloud BPM Tools Comparison conclusions.
Performing an objective cloud BPM tools comparison is a complex task. The criteria
involved in making the decision that is more important to a Manager than the endless
list of features. The four main management criteria we identify are: Ease of Adoption,
Economic Convenience, Agility to respond to changes and Coverage of future
situations. In this article, we analyzed the main cloud-based BPM Suites using these
criteria. Although we may have interests in this comparison, we have sought to give
an objective and realistic view.

6. It has become clear from this analysis that a useful cloud BPM tools comparison
involves several variables. And since no two tools are the same, and no two
evaluators the same, the most important recommendation is that you try the tools. It
is best to choose a real, medium complexity process. And then fully implement it with
the BPM tool, analyzing how it behaves in each of the four dimensions.
At Flokzu we offer a free 14-day trial of our Premium service. We also offer BPM
consultancy at no charge, to help you set up the first process and really get to know
the software before making a decision.